Stello DP200 and Lavry DA10

[humanflyz]

For all you guys who are banned:

Granodemostasa, another fellow Berkeley Head-Case'r, has graciously dropped off his Lavry DA10 for me to compare against my newly acquired Stello DP200. I think this will be a good comparison because both units are DAC/headamp combos, both can act as a pre-amp. That's where the similarities end.

The Lavry is a non-upsampling DAC employing op-amps in Class-A mode in its analog output stage, while the Stello is a upsampling DAC (up to 192, with an option to bypass upsampling altogether) using fully-discrete, Class-A, balanced output stage. The Stello has a remote-control while the Lavry does not. Some pictures will better illustrate the difference:

The two units on top of each other: you'll notice that the Lavry looks tiny compared to the Stello and has a lot more switches. Aesthetically, I like the Stello's minimalist looks, but there is a certain charm to the Lavry's toggles and switches that give it a retro-sci fi look. Both have very good built quality, as should be expected in units costing this much (Stello goes for $2200 new, I got it used for $1600; Lavry goes for $1000 new, around $800 used), although the Stello weighs substantially more.

This is the remote: it is a very solid piece and has real weight to it when held, so it is not a flimsy piece of plastic. It has all the controls you need on a remote controlling a DAC and Pre-amp: digital inputs/outputs switching, analog input/output switching, volume, upsampling, on/off. It will also control the Stello transport if you have it.

The back panel of the two units: this is where the Stello straight up beat the Lavry in terms of flexibility: the Stello has nearly every digital/analog input/output you can think of. In terms of digital: the Stello has 2 coaxial, 1 toslink, and 1 AES/EBU. It also has a digital output section that has 1 coaxial, 1 toslink, and 1 AES/EBU output, so you can use it as a digital loop-out for digital recording. In terms of analog inputs: it has 1 balanced input, two single-ended input (one of which can be converted to a phono input if the optional phono module is installed). In terms of analog outputs: it has both single-ended and balanced outputs that can either be a fixed or variable output, so you can use it either purely as a DAC, a pre-amp, or both. Finally, it has an hometheatre bypass input option. So the Stello is like a one-stop control stage for all your digital and analog needs.

And finally, the amp that will be driven by the Lavry and Stello: the FirstWatt F1

Testing equipment:

In this listening session, I am going to use the Lavry and the Stello as DAC/pre-amp combos. Since each of them has volume-control, they will be connected directly to my FirstWatt F1 power-amplifier, which drives my K1000s. The digital signal is fed by a USB transport into the Stello, and the digital loop-out section of the Stello is connected to the Lavry's digital input. My equipment chain is fully-balanced, and there is no single-ended comparisons in this one. My main focus will be on the K1000s, since they are revealing enough to tell me differences between upstream components. I will test out both the Lavry's and the Stello's headphone amp section using the HD650s with stock everything, but that won't be the focus of this session. I will not use the Stello's upsampling functions in order to keep the comparison fair. But if upsampling has some notable sonic effects, I will mention them.

I just want to say that both units are already burnt-in, and I have had extensive experience with the Lavry previously, having owned it for about 6 months before I sold it to purchase the Stello.

Songs Used

The following songs were used in the course of this listening session. They are songs that I'm intimately familiar with. Their recording quality ranges from excellent to mediocre, and it is representative of my musical tastes.

1) Antony and the Johnsons - Fistful of Love (from I Am A Bird Now)

2) Bob Dylan - Meet Me In The Morning (from Blood On The Tracks)

3) Brian Wilson - Good Vibrations (from Smile, the completed version)

4) John Wiliam - Duel Of The Fates (from the Star Wars Episode I soundtrack)

5) Massive Attack - Dissolved Girl (from Mezzanine)

6) Muddy Waters - Good Morning Little School Girl (from Folksinger)

7) Neko Case - John Saw That Number (from Fox Confessor Brings The Flood)

Stevie Ray Vaughn - Little Wing (from The Sky Is Crying)

Listening Impressions

There's a caveat to be said here: upsampling does make a difference, at least in my system. I know I said that I will not use the upsampling on my Stello to keep it fair, but it turns out that this method won't really yield anything for me. Why? Because I really couldn't tell the difference between the Stello and Lavry when upsampling is not used. I'm sure with more concentration and effort, I might have heard some difference, but then I wouldn't be very confident of making that claim. So as far as I'm concerned, I would not be reliably able to tell which is which if upsampling is not used.

Now when upsampling on the Stello was engaged (up to 192), the differences became more apparent. I was more confident that I'm hearing actual differences, as I didn't have to listen hard to tell the differences. So for the rest of this thread, please assume that when I'm talking about the Stello, I'm talking about it with upsampling ON.

1) Antony and the Johnsons - Fistful of Love

The differences I heard from this song, going back and forth from Stello to Lavry, are typical of the differences that I heard throughout the rest of the session. The first thing that made me take notice was that with upsampling on, voices take on more weight. Antony, the singer of the band, has a unique, vibrato voice. The Lavry articulated that voice very clearly, but when I switched to the Stello, I noticed that his voice become meatier, but without losing that vibratto which characterizes his voice. The second big thing I noticed is the gain in dimensionality. The best way I can describe it is that the Lavry paints a sonic landscape that is detailed, clear, and precise. Once I switched to the Stello, that landscape seems to take on 3-dimensional characteristics, so that I'm no longer just looking at "flat" things in the picture. Instead, each element of the sonic landscape took on its own dimension, so the soundstage gained depth and dimension. It's as if the things in the pictures stepped out of the two-dimensional plane and stood in their own space. The end result is the each instrument is projected more forwardly into the soundstage but without collapsing its size. This made following elements of the song easier, as I don't have to concentrate as hard. This dimensionality, combined with the added weight, made this song more palpable for me.

2) Bob Dylan - Meet Me In The Morning

Again, similar effects are happening: Dylan's voice just seems more "real" to me on the Stello. Dynamics are also better on the Stello.

3) Brian Wilson - Good Vibrations

Going back to the Lavry from the Stello made everything seems a bit flatter, so that element of palpability is lost.

4) John Williams - Duel of the Fates

I love this song because of its dynamics and sheer scale: it goes from soft to loud in incredibly short amount of time, and the choral effects create a massive sense of scale. Well the Stello has got the Lavry beat on both accounts. The sense of scale is amazing on the Stello: it really shows off the size of the chorus, and as the chorus reaches its crescendo, the sense of sheer power is conveyed really well. On the Lavry, the chorus seems recessed, so that sheer sense of power is not conveyed as well.

5) Massive Attack - Dissolved Girl

The differences were minor on this track. The only thing that I could tell was that I needed more juice on the Lavry to get to my satisfactory listening level. However, when I reached this point, the Lavry is slightly more sibilant on the female vocals than the Stello.

6) Muddy Waters - Good Morning Little School Girl

This is where the Stello's black black background really helped. I was sitting in my comfy chair in the dark, and suddenly Muddy Water's voice literally BOOMS out of a silent background, and it really just startled me and made me sit up and open my eyes. Muddy Waters just has an incredibly booming voice, and the Stello really conveyed that. The Stello conveyed the energy of his guitar playing, but it never got to be too aggressive and harsh. And this is where the Lavry falls short just a bit: while it conveyed Muddy Water's voice fine, it had a little trouble controlling some of the more energetic guitar parts, so while it retained the energy, it didn't have the smoothness.

7) Neko Case - John Saw That Number

This is not the best recording, but I happen to LOVE Neko Case, and this song always ends up being one my test tracks. There is a drum kit at the beginning, and on the Lavry, it sounded a bit thin. But on the Stello, the same drum kit had more punch. That's about all I can say for this track.

My thoughts:

Do I think my new purchase is worth it? First, let me say something about the upsampling issue. I attribute the differences I heard between the Stello and the Lavry to upsampling, because I honestly couldn't say, with any confidence, that I could tell the differences when both had no upsampling. But when upsampling is used, I found the Stello better, though it's not certainly not night and day. Having said that, even if the Stello had no upsampling, I still would not have regretted my purchase, since all the extra features easily made up for the fact that it sounded no better than the Lavry when upsampling is not used. For me, the extra cost is more than justified by all the features of convenience found on the Stello.

[Iron_Dreamer]

Interesting comparison, the results sound somewhat familiar

[Gabe Logan]

Thanks for the impressions humanflyz.I can't get over the fact on how HUGE the Stello is to the Lavry.

[doctorcilantro]

I'm confused why you say the DA-10 doesn't upsample. Maybe I have it wrong but I thought it uses a crystal for each sample rate, but can also do SRC when you throw, for example, 44kHz at it and set the DA-10 to 96kHz.

You don't mention your source either; CD tranport or PC. If PC, what sample rate was sent to the units.

Lavry Engineering :: Log in

another thread: Lavry Engineering :: Log in

DC

[humanflyz]

The reason why I only used the crystal mode on the DA10 was because Lavry said that crystal mode sounded the best. If you send me a DA10, I'll be more than happy to a proper comparison, since I still have the Stello.

[doctorcilantro]

I was confused and not sure about the correct answer, hence the fact that I took the time to register here and discuss the issue, not point fingers. I apologize if you do not have the energy to do the same; two years, fours years, forty years..it's still a flawed comparison. If someone doesn't want to join yet another forum, my links are useless; I agree with your groundbreaking logic ; ) What a warm welcome....

DC

[cclragnarok]

The comparison might be flawed in some ways, but it's still a valid and useful comparison. Basically, humanflyz used the manufacturer-recommended modes for both the Lavry (crystal) and the Stello (upsampling). He found that the Stello sounded better to him.

[Jon L]

Stello DP200 is actually a combo of DAC + separate balanced class A preamp, not just a DAC with a volume control like Lavry, so it's technically not a fair fight.

However, since Stello DP200 has analogue inputs, how about running the Lavry's output into Stello's preamp section and comparing?

[doctorcilantro]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the Stello was auditioned with upsampling to 192kHz. The Lavry, shown in the first pic, is set to 44kHz. I assume a CD transport was used based on the entire post (as opposed to native 96/192khz material on a PC). Wouldn't a valid comparision have both units at say 44kHz or maybe 96kHz; the max of the Lavry?

Dc

[cclragnarok]

Stello DP200 is actually a combo of DAC + separate balanced class A preamp, not just a DAC with a volume control like Lavry, so it's technically not a fair fight.

However, since Stello DP200 has analogue inputs, how about running the Lavry's output into Stello's preamp section and comparing?

That's a good point. This is really more of a DAC+preamp comparison than a DAC comparison. The F1 shouldn't be hard to drive though (I'm only guessing here based on the fact that it's SS with low output power).

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the Stello was auditioned with upsampling to 192kHz. The Lavry, shown in the first pic, is set to 44kHz. I assume a CD transport was used based on the entire post (as opposed to native 96/192khz material on a PC). Wouldn't a valid comparision have both units at say 44kHz or maybe 96kHz; the max of the Lavry?

Dc

As long as it sounds good, who cares about the sampling rate? Are you saying that the 192kHz mode on the Stello should not be used in this comparison simply because the Lavry is not capable of it?

Ideally, both units would be using the settings that give the best sound. While the crystal mode is not necessarily the one that sounds best to humanflyz, at least it is recommended by the manufacturer.

[deepak]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the Stello was auditioned with upsampling to 192kHz. The Lavry, shown in the first pic, is set to 44kHz. I assume a CD transport was used based on the entire post (as opposed to native 96/192khz material on a PC). Wouldn't a valid comparision have both units at say 44kHz or maybe 96kHz; the max of the Lavry?

Dc

You're saying he should have found a transport that can do 24/96 (and using high resolution audio files) to the Lavry so the review would have been fair? Sorry that sounds a bit absurd.

To address your second point he was running both DACs at their best (or recommended) setting 192hz and crystal lock respectively. There isn't anything that makes this unfair.

[humanflyz]

Holy thread revival Batman!

Anyways, I think the good Dr. misunderstood what I did (take this with a grain of salt because it's been a while) was play the same 16/44.1 tracks on my computer, using the DP200's digital out to feed the Lavry's digital input.

I used the Crystal lock mode because it was recommended by the manufacturer, and on one comparison, I bypassed the Stello's upsampling, so I didn't think it was an unfair comparison.

I think I also fed the Stello's balanced inputs from my Lavry's balanced outputs, but in my opinion that would've introduced another variable, which would be the Stello's separate pre-amp section. So I thought the simplest thing would be to drive the F1 directly with both. I couldn't think of a way to volume match the two sources, because only the Stello had a fixed output option, and I didn't know what volume setting on the Lavry would have been the equivalent.

[Sherwood]

I still have the Stello.

Thanks, that's all the review I need

[humanflyz]

Thanks, that's all the review I need

Actually I would (and did have) get something better, because the Stello is mid-fi at best. My reasons for keeping it were two-fold: first, despite its flaws, it has a sound that I can live with, and second, it is pretty convenient in terms of the feature set (its own dedicated headphone amp and phono inputs with adjustable loading).

[Sherwood]

well then the better question is: what did you get?

[humanflyz]

I got an Estoeric SA60, but sold it because I was no longer in college, and my music listening time was dramatically reduced. Also, eventually I came to not like the SA60 as much as I did.

[Voltron]

what was it about the SA60 you came to not like?

Probably the fact that it was an Esoteric.

[gregdee]

nice review mate

I never heard any of them ,so it's quite informative

txs

greg

[Currawong]

Someone needs to read their welcome PM again I think.